tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4057487038565855826.post352317429282044763..comments2024-02-21T08:52:55.878+00:00Comments on Your Freedom and Ours: Liberal and illiberal revolutionsHelenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13799545178433498944noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4057487038565855826.post-84601570859991289172009-08-03T15:30:25.000+01:002009-08-03T15:30:25.000+01:00I don't think the end of the Second World War ...I don't think the end of the Second World War is quite so explicit the divide between Liberty and il-liberty. Quite plainly the elite in Britain had already bought into the idea of central planning long before and the war provided yet another opportunity to ratchet down liberty. I wouldn't dispute it was significant step but I would say a bigger one was the Act for compulsory education and the subsequent take over of the institutions by the state. This has been far slower in enactment (indeed it is still ongoing) but the effects are far worse.TDKnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4057487038565855826.post-74895376011731945192009-07-23T19:26:17.000+01:002009-07-23T19:26:17.000+01:00//It is always alternative elites that produce rev...//It is always alternative elites that produce revolutions not the people. Who do you think the Whigs were in 1688? The peasants?//<br /><br />I absolutely agree with this! But that does not make regime change a revolution.<br /><br />Regime change, whether illiberal or liberal, does not seem to me to be the same kind of revolution as a revolution. <br /><br />Regime change seems more often to be influenced by outsiders - either directly through regime change imposed by force, covertly though sponsoring and intelligence efforts, or through financial clout. In each case the stimulus came from outside.<br /><br />In 1989 Eastern Europe was the latter kind. When the Russians had to withdraw the region fell towards the default position of the strongest states in the region because they had the money to help pull them out of a hole. The revolutions generated no new ideas that could threaten the dominant power structures. They simply conformed, is the antithesis of revolution.<br /><br />In contrast the French, Russian, German, Cuban, and Iranian revolutions were home grown, and as a consequence out of sync with the done thing in their regions at that time. (Iranian was limited by the lack of Shia but it had an affect on Iraq where there were Shia). A mere illiberal regime change, such as Chavez in Venezuela, did not mean as much to already socialist South America as perhaps did Castro's takeover of Cuba, because it was not a rejection of the principles of the surrounding, largely socialist, states. In fact, it appears a conforming regime change.<br /><br />Given the fact their are so many more illiberal revolutions than true liberal revolutions, rather than regime changes, the US revolution was pretty incredible. <br /><br />What did they called the US and Glorious revolutions before the word "revolution" came into use circa 1799? Civil wars?therewaslightnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4057487038565855826.post-15233697488290395712009-07-23T14:32:00.000+01:002009-07-23T14:32:00.000+01:00A revolution is a regime change not just a change ...A revolution is a regime change not just a change of elites. Which is precisely what happened in Eastern Europe: the regime was changed completely to constitutional democracies in which liberties were guaranteed in practice and not just in the constitution. So they were liberal revolutions. It is always alternative elites that produce revolutions not the people. Who do you think the Whigs were in 1688? The peasants?<br /><br />You are right about Hitler heading another illiberal revolution though he, too, was playing catch-up with the Soviet Union. Never quite succeeded.Helennoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4057487038565855826.post-44343600979664114752009-07-23T13:34:35.000+01:002009-07-23T13:34:35.000+01:00The "revolutions" in Eastern Europe wer...The "revolutions" in Eastern Europe were no such thing - more a case of regime change where a rival elite to the communists took advantage of Russian weakness and military withdrawal to grab power. They did not invent anything new, just caught up with the West. <br /><br />I would add the Nazi upheaval in Germany to the list of illiberal revolutions.therewaslightnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4057487038565855826.post-52445003008087225962009-07-23T13:15:27.000+01:002009-07-23T13:15:27.000+01:00Liberal revolutions require a Christian culture.Liberal revolutions require a Christian culture.Guestnoreply@blogger.com